4.6 Article

Intercalibration between DMSP/OLS and VIIRS night-time light images to evaluate city light dynamics of Syria's major human settlement during Syrian Civil War

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING
卷 38, 期 21, 页码 5934-5951

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01431161.2017.1331476

关键词

-

资金

  1. Key Laboratory of Spatial Data Mining & Information Sharing of Ministry of Education, Fuzhou University [2016LSDMIS03]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2042016kf0162]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province [2014CFB726]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Monthly composites of night-time light acquired from the Meteorological Satellite Program's Operational Linescan System (DMSP/OLS) had been used to evaluate socio-economic dynamics and human rights during the Syrian Civil War, which started in March 2011. However, DMSP/OLS monthly composites are not available subsequent to February 2014, and the only available night-time light composites for that period were acquired from the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership satellite's Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (Suomi NPP/VIIRS). This article proposes an intercalibration model to simulate DMSP/OLS composites from the VIIRS day-and-night band (DNB) composites, by using a power function for radiometric degradation and a Gaussian low pass filter for spatial degradation. The DMSP/OLS data and the simulated DMSP/OLS data were combined to estimate the city light dynamics in Syria's major human settlement between March 2011 and January 2017. Our analysis shows that Syria's major human settlement lost about 79% of its city light by January 2017, with Aleppo, Daraa, Deir ez-Zor, and Idlib provinces losing 89%, 90%, 96%, and 99% of their light, respectively, indicating that these four provinces were most affected by the war. We also found that the city light in Syria and 12 provinces rebounded from early 2016 to January 2017, possibly as a result of the peace negotiation signed in Geneva.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据